Well, it’s really because I think neither Leigh Corfman nor Beverly Nelson’s accusations are credible.
Leigh Corfman’s account has too many holes in it apart from it being incongruous with accounts of Roy Moore’s behavior with the other women in the Washington Post story. Let’s not forget that kids were a lot more independent in the 70s and 80s. 9 year old kids walked or rode their bicycles to school and went to the park and to the store by themselves. In my neighborhood in the 80s, 12 year old girls took jobs as babysitters and watched younger kids in public places. Corfman was 14 – why would her mother need her watched at the courthouse in the middle of the day like a six year old?
As for Beverly Nelson; despite her “powerful” crying during her Press Conference, at this time all surface indications, including Gloria Allred’s refusal to submit the yearbook for independent forensic analysis as demanded by Roy Moore’s campaign, point to her allegation being made up. There are now stories that the parking lot behind the restaurant in which she claimed he assaulted her in his car did not and has never existed.
Now, while I can concede that dating teenagers in your 30s meets the definition of creepy, I’m not going to call Roy Moore a creep because the pattern of behavior that invariably accompanies that type of character, during the period and *forty* years afterward, just isn’t there …
The facts are;
- He clearly dated older women during that time so it’s not like he was exclusively, or even mostly, targeting teenagers.
- His behavior during those dates was that of a gentleman according to even his accuser (Debbie Wesson Gibson) that is a partisan Democrat.
- He married and has seemingly stayed faithful for 33 years to a woman who was then 24 and a divorced mother – falsifying the notion that he was looking for someone young and “inexperienced” so he could dominate, “mold” and control.
Moore apparently had a dating range that started at ~17 and up. Even if he thought it wasn’t weird, he would know if the community thought so. But he clearly considered it unremarkable enough that, just like with all women he dated (his wife included), he also asked parents for permission to date their daughters of that age … and it appears the girls’ parents agreed with him that there was nothing wrong with him taking their daughter out because they gave him permission.
Besides, most of the outrage about him dating 17 and 18 year olds is fake, especially on the part of the media; here are numerous instances of celebrity relationships over the years where one party was a teen.
- Bo Derek (16) & John Derek (30)
- Demi Moore (17) & Freddy Moore (29)
- Taran Noah Smith (17) & Heidi Van Pelt (33)
- Shoshanna Lonstein (17) & Jerry Seinfeld (38)
- Cher (18) & Sonny Bono (29)
- Courtney Stodden (16) & Doug Hutchison (51)
Most of the above relationships are much more recent; Demi Moore and Freddy Moore were married in 1980, Seinfeld’s relationship with Lonstein was in 1992, Smith and van Pelt in 2001. Stodden and Hutchison’s marriage was in *2011*.
Where is the media outrage? And of course, considering that practically every major media organization stood up to defend the (thankfully dying) Teen Vogue publishing an article instructing their teen female target audience on how to have anal sex, do you honestly think all this outrage is sincere?
As for the new allegations that popped up during the week, there’s no verifiable evidence either.
Furthermore, just as tellingly, there’s no record of any complaint from them, contemporaneous or otherwise, that is documented in the last 40 years. This is not to mention, the timing of their allegations.
At least with people like Bill Cosby, Bill Clinton, Harvey Weinstein, etc. there were contemporaneous documented complaints from *some* women in one way or the other. With Al Franken, there’s actually a photograph.
Now, I understand that some women could decide to put such an incident behind them. But there are almost as many women who simply would not. Now that it looks like half the women who were teenagers in the 1970s in Etowah County are claiming to have been asked out or molested by Roy Moore, what are the chances that *every single woman* allegedly assaulted by Roy Moore would keep quiet about it, file no reports, or talk to a journalist over the next 40 years?
It’s just not very plausible.
And neither are the stories of him trawling high schools and malls for dates. The mall’s management denies it ever happened, and there’s no way it would remain quiet for 40 years if he displayed such behavior around a high school.
At some point, you’ll have to ask how he could have had the time to do any work in the DA’s office, because he was apparently spending all his time roaming around asking young girls out on dates.
At best, I think a large number of the women coming out of the woodwork to level accusations at Roy Moore are doing it out of some notion of “solidarity” i.e. “#MeToo”. They honestly believe he is guilty and want to ensure he doesn’t get away with it, so they’re “helping.” Others, at worst, are simply partisans and are just lying.
Endpoint; it is a mistake to just accept unproven and unprovable allegations as true. It is also a mistake to take the volume of unproven and unprovable allegations as proof that the allegations are true.
Now, there is a chance that I could be proven wrong in spectacular fashion and end up looking like a willfully blind fool.
But I’ve always tried to lean toward innocence because I think the presumption of innocence should be just as much a matter of the culture as it is a fixture in the courtroom.
Recently, Carl Sargeant, a Labour Member of the Welsh Assembly in the UK was suddenly sacked from his ministerial post upon accusations being leveled against him for “unwanted attention, inappropriate touching or groping.” Humiliated, his name all over the headlines, he begged and pleaded in vain for details of the charges against him and his accuser so he could start to marshal a defense. So he hanged himself.
While I presume Roy Moore is not inclined toward suicide, I’d still much rather presume innocence and later be proven wrong than join a lynch mob, presume guilt and then be proven wrong.